Tuesday, March 27, 2007

Often, the hidden messages of a phrase carry more weight than its literal interpretation.The phrase “Thou shalt not judge,” is a fine example.It’s an adaptation from a quote attributed to Jesus, “Judge not, and ye shall not be judged” (Matthew 7:1 and Luke 6:37).Although the Bible has other passages encouraging judging, the phrase in question has far more currency today, especially among liberal Christians.I believe its lasting popularity is due to a rather dark mind game that it carries with it.The mind game has several components.

First, the phrase is most often used in a context where some obvious wrong has been committed, but is being excused by the speaker.It’s one thing to acknowledge a mistake, learn from it, and make amends.It’s another thing entirely to sweep it under the rug.The hidden message is that you, too, have skeletons in your closet, so don’t draw attention to this one.Such a message is simply an abdication of responsibility.

The phrase is also often used between believers as a kind of collusion between thugs in the name of the thug boss, God.To use it is to say, “Keep your nose out of my business with the mafia boss, and I’ll stay out of your business.Otherwise, the boss will rub you out.”It is a kind of promise that if you excuse the speaker’s act of thuggery he’ll look the other way when you later commit yours.Occasionally, it’s used as a kind of religious tolerance mechanism to deal with the fact that there are thousands of sects of Christianity, each with their own unique and contradictory interpretation of the Bible.As long as the harm in question is directed against non-Christians, it should be excused in the name of ecumenicism.

At another level, using the phrase is admission that there is no solid morality on which to decide moral issues.With a lack of any sort of absolute morality from God, the speaker is left to create a smoke screen that distracts from this uncomfortable fact.The notion of an absolute morality from God is perhaps one of the most pernicious myths of the western religions.

Biblical passage is really a prohibition against being a hypocrite.That contextualized meaning has long since vanished, apparently.The hidden messages of the shorter phrase have far more utility.In the future, listen closely in the situations when “thou shalt not judge” is used.See if you can find someone avoiding responsibility for their actions or beliefs; looking to make a shady deal to downplay an act of thuggery; or hiding the fact that they don’t have a sound basis to tell right from wrong.When you catch someone using the phrase in this manner, call them on the carpet.Judge.

12 comments:

Again in context, It says not to judge each other as saved christians because we are all of the body of Christ. But Judge the unsaved in their wickedness. It doesn't say to not to judge someone raping a child, this is an example of good judging. We are not to judge eachother as to say "I am a better christian then you." this is something we should not do, it's unproductive and not allowed. Saying "atheist if you do not repent and trust in the savior you will be punished by a Holy God" now this is good judgement.

I love matthew 7 it says a lot of great wisdom. Look at this AE blog to see if it has good fruit.Look at what God is saying about atheist and non believers a like:

11If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?

12Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

13Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:

14Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

15Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

16Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

17Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

But Judge the unsaved in their wickedness. How do YOU know who is, ultimately, those who shall be saved? Do you retroactively apologize for all the judging you did before they "opened their heart", if they open their heart?

It doesn't say to not to judge someone raping a child, this is an example of good judging.I would hope you'd do just a bit more than judge someone raping a child. Like, oh...say, kick their ass. I think you meant to say "judge someone who HAS RAPED a child." Because, seriously, if you stumble upon a man RAPING a child, you better fucking do a lot more than just stand there and go, "You know... God doesn't approve of this."

We are not to judge eachother as to say "I am a better christian then you." this is something we should not do, it's unproductive and not allowed. But, you guys do it so well...

Saying "atheist if you do not repent and trust in the savior you will be punished by a Holy God" now this is good judgement. No. That's not called "judgement", that's called being a prick. If you're just walking around threatening people with no evidence that you actually have a VERIFIABLE PROOF that their behavior is going to result in an eternal consequence or reward, then you're no better than the teacher's pet, school bully.

11If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?

So, how do you explain all of those poor, starving Africans that have accepted Jesus but still have no clean water or food? Whilst I sit here eating a molasses cookie and drinking a diet coke... Your god sucks at distributing his gifts.

13Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:

Well, since the "many" are calling themselves Christian... I shall take the narrow road.

15Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. *cough*danmarvin*cough**cough*davidkoresh*cough**cough*tedhaggart*cough**cough*popebenedict*cough**cough*josephsmith*cough**cough*jerryfalwell*cough**cough*jamesdobson*cough*

16Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Actually, I've heard that they gather cash...lots and lots of cash. *points to the above list*Except for the first guy on that list,...he gathers attention. Craves it, in fact.

19Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

You'd think your god would have a better policy towards the environment.

a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. Is AE corrupt? You be the JudgeOK! I say, "AE is GREAT!" Oh...wait, now you're probably going to throw some qualifications up for the job of "judge". *rolls eyes*

Accountability time, CB. On 3.23.2007, at 6:14 Pm I issued you a public challenge on this blog.

YOU claimed YOU could PROVE Jesus existed. ("He did exist provable through either public or private records.") I challenged you to do so. You have defaulted on the challenge, CB. According to the Code of the Southern Gentleman, you have now PUBLICALLY branded yourself a coward and a liar.

I herewith formally, publically, and justifiably call you out before your family, the readers of this post, and the rest of the world as a liar and a coward. I mean the full extent of the word liar and the full extent of the word coward.

YOU claimed you could prove Jesus existed, CB. You did not. You lied. You are a liar, CB Dan Marvin. Proud of yourself? Think your son will be proud to carry on the name of a liar? If he grows to be the man you are not, I doubt it.

You are a coward, CB Dan Marvin, because you will use the excuse you were on a different response spot; you were at church; you don't have to prove faith; etc, etc, etc. Whatever lie you come up with, liar CB Dan Marvin, matters not. I know, and YOU know YOU claimed to be able to prove Jesus existed, I challenged to do so, you read the challenge, realized you were on the spot and ran, like the yellow-backed coward you are.

You are in great company, liar and coward CB Dan Marvin. You can hold hands with Ted Haggard, the coward who couldn't come out of the back room until he'd had his way with another man, and then stood behind his pulpit and lied that all "fags" are god damned.

No matter WHAT you say from now on, Chickensh**t Bullsh**tter Dan Marvin, you are known to this site and all who read this blog as just another mouthbreather who, when given the chance to WALK HIS TALK, ran like a crying baby, showing to his wife, his children, and the world he is no man.

Chickensh**t Bullsh**tter Dan Marvin: Shut up and leave. You are a coward and a liar. You do not deserve to be among men and women of honor and integrity, men and women who WALK THE TALK they speak with evidence and truth.

You have been treated as a gentleman, CB Dan Marvin, given your chance to back your claim. A man can ask for no more out of life. You failed to measure up, CB Dan Marvin. From this moment forward, EVERY time you speak on this post I will remind both you and the rest of the world that you are a liar and a coward.

Time to limp home to your wife/mother figure and leave the big dogs to their play, you lying cowardly puppy.

In the last post I proved there is a god if you read it obviously you didn’t otherwise you would have commented on it. So here is some of what I said about this subject

“Proof of existence has been presented time after time even though you deny it or don’t believe it, but it doesn’t matter what you believe what matters is the truth. When you eat chocolate or smell a flower from a lemon tree or see the harmony of life here on earth, you see God. Some people say they believe that all this was created by explosions and that takes far more belief then a creator. Some people say we came from a primordial gooey substance and that takes far more faith to believe that then a creator. We all have faith, either in man or God, either science or the creator who created the platform for science to be explored. Creation science, I can understand logically, and it fits with an explanation for creation. Evolutionist and big bang theorist is reaching too far for logic to grasp, they also believe man decides truth and that isn’t so, God does.

“When your life is filled with the desire to see the holiness in everyday life, something magical happens: ordinary life becomes extraordinary, and the very process of life begins to nourish your soul!”

Secondly let’s look scripturally what is said about manifestation and proof of God Jesus said these words to unbelievers and I feel they fit here also.First in John 4:48 “Then said Jesus unto him, Except ye see signs and wonders, ye will not believe.”

So he knew full well he would have to perform miracles to get people to believe, such as turning water into wine and raising people up from the grave.

In John 5:37-47 Jesus said “And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape. And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not.

Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life. I receive not honour from men. But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you.

I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive. How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only? Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust. For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?”Of course there is always John 14:21 ” He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.”There you have it concrete proof of how to see God. God will never come to our terms of manifestation you must come to God on his terms and he promises to manifest himself to you.

Another proof of God’s existence is my own heart and how it truly has changed in such a dramatic way after being born again. I hinted a little of my past behavior and it was quite wrong and mean and God gave me a kind and generous and loving heart and I am amazed everyday of what God shows me and how he communicates with me. There are three ways you can take Jesus. He was either, a liar, a lunatic, or the Lord with all that he claimed. If a miracle happened right in front of you, you would grab witnesses and write everything down what you saw and tell everyone you meet what happened, well that is what happened back when Jesus was around people saw what happened and wrote everything down and told everyone of the good news and it kept going until 2007 years later we are still talking about it. There was skeptics back then and there is also skeptics here today. Things hasn’t changed God requires us to do it his way. Instead of the blasphemy challenge God gave us all the salvation challenge that whoever repents and turns away from sin and gives their life to Jesus and put all you faith and trust in him he will manifest himself to you. Jesus said long ago ” Except ye see signs and wonders, ye will not believe.” and he is willing and able even today if you do as he asks. He convinced without any doubts a retched sinner such as me and he can do the same for you.

You don’t have to do anything dramatic like what you promised if I proved to you that Jesus is real but if you take the salvation challenge you will get every answer you are looking for with clarity of mind and no one can tell you any different.

Using the words from a book of poorly translated plagiarized lies to prove that book of poorly translated plagiarized lies IS NOT PROOF, you cowardly liar. Can you truly be THAT STUPID as well as gutless, you sniveling yellow-backed liar? (This book is true because this book says it's true) You are not fit to speak among women and men of reason. SHUT UP AND LEAVE, you have been proven a liar, proven a coward, proven to be nothing but a sniveling fool.

Eating chocolate? Smelling flowers? Have you NO SHAME, you cowardly little lying puppy? I said, offer proof, not FEELINGS. Let me ram an electrode into your brain, give you just the right juice and Danny Boy, you quivering, yellow-backed lying little coward, I will MAKE you see Jesus in living technicolor as has been done in actual experiments!

To all who read this, including your own unfortunate spouse and even more unfortunate offspring (who wants a cowardly, lying yellow-back for a daddy?) Dan the Chickensh**t Bullsh**tter Marvin is STILL lying and making no sense.

Chickensh**t Bullsh**tter Dan Marvin is a liar, a coward, and again has defecated amazingly ignorant claims. NOTHING he says need be answered, NOTHING he says has ANY value other than for instructional purposes.....

Wait a minute! Ah, you sneaky little guys! That's it, isn't it? There IS NO Dan Marvin! You invented him to play Devil's Advocate (no pun intended) for us to sharpen our own skills! No man could possibly be that dense! I should have guessed! How dense could I have been? A Jesus freak so AMAZINGLY stupid as to say "When Jesus REVILES himself..." should have tipped me off!

Good show! You had me going so much I even formally challenged 'him' to prove 'his' claim which of course 'he' couldn't, because 'he' is an archetype, 'he' doesn't really exist!

Imagine, though, if such a fool really DID exist...the mind reels with revulsion. How horrid it would be to really have a daddy who was a coward and a liar, one who made a complete spectacle of himself to the whole world.

I salute you! And by the way, let the poor sap whose picture you're using to represent 'Dan Marvin' off the hook. I don't know about him, but I wouldn't want my visage associated with a 'person' like the example xian idiot you all drew up.

Good fun, but it is kind of dragging. "Dan Marvin," a xian too stupid to spell, use correct grammer, even make logical sense, what a hoot! Where'd you come up with that name anyway?

This was for Matt but it fits for you also Otto so I pose to you "Play God for a Day" answer your own question with "YOUR" solution to the problem instead of sitting on the bench just sitting there never getting called on to play. Coach is letting you play now. Are you ready for the game? I posed to Matt and now you:

“OK let me pose something to you. When I was a part of a start-up company long ago (in six years we were making $50 million a year) I had a lot of people complaining, such as you, of how unfair things were or that we didn’t have the right equipment and negative input such as this. So I posed to my crew that if someone had a complaint to not just come to me with the complaint but to come to me with the issue and a “solution” to solve that problem. BTW the complaining was reduced to near zero and we had empowered employees that knew how to solve issues that arise with a company of that kind of growth.

So I pose to you “You are God” how would you do thing different then him to solve the issues that he has? Remember you have an entire race to deal with. Millions of variables how would you solve his issues? Play God for a day and set the world strait. Pick a subject of your choice and solve it better then him.

Example problem there is free will how do you instill morals into a human race and keep them from hurting others? Do a blog about it call it “Atheist are now God” how you would solve the world with ultimate authority instead of just complaining people on the sidelines. I would be very interested as to the others input and how people would pose different situations and solve the problems. It could be fun and it may change people’s mind of how hard it is to run a universe.”

Is there a lack of peace in your heart? To slander someone you are debating with is a clear indication that you are loosing the augment and I do not have to address you anymore.

Look at G. Points of Personal Privilege At any time during the debate, a debater may rise to a point of personal privilege when he or she believes that an opponent has personally insulted one of the debaters, has made an offensive or tasteless comment, or has grievously misconstrued another’s words or arguments. The Speaker will then rule on whether or not the comments were acceptable.

BTW I still have great love for you Otto and I hope you find the answers for your questions about life. I am here for you to answer any questions you want no matter how you feel about me. I am here to “reveal” the truth.

You were formally challenged to prove what YOU said you could do. I did not put words in your mouth. YOU made the claim "He did exist provable through either public or private records." I did not challenge you to make statements about your job. I did not challenge you to make stupid statements like you did about playing god.

And CB Dan? I have not slandered you. I have stated a fact. You are a liar. You said you could prove Jesus existed and you have not. You are a coward. You have skirted the challenge with such baldfaced yellow-backed cowardliness you make Bert Lahr look like Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Put your rule book away, puppy. I did not misconstrue any statements. You made them, I QUOTED YOU VERBATIM. I stand here in front of all, my challenge for you to back up what you claimed WITH PROOF and I remain standing here UNANSWERED by you. I reaffirm my right to call you by the name you so righteously deserve.

The only question I have for you, Chickensh**t Bullsh**tter Dan Marvin, is how you can call yourself a man when you have been bested, not only by me, but by EVERYONE ELSE on this site.

Time to go home, you lying, cowardly yellow-backed wanna-be man. I gave you a fair chance, you failed. I'm beginning to see why everyone else here is so furious with you...

People have been killed in the name of the stupid sh**t you claim you can prove. Don't talk to me about "peace in your heart," you lying coward.

>Tracie ” And when I saw that what was true conflicted with my belief in god's existence, then truth won out.” prove this statement.

_My belief_ in god was founded on many different things. One was, for example, that the Bible was god’s word. When I realized that there is no claim from god that this is his word, I was left with the reality that people put this book together and claimed god endorsed their actions. _My belief_ in god was that actions of people required clear authorization from god. This was lacking—and created a _truth_ that conflicted with _my belief_ in god. Therefore, “what was true” conflicted with “my belief in god.” There are many more examples I could provide, but this one should be enough to illustrate my point.

>“Also, I don’t think you know what an atheist is, still. An atheist is anyone who lacks belief in god. ” this is a false statement, Tracie look at the definition you can’t change it. They deny the existence of God. I like you Tracie I hope God will touch both you and Stephen someday in your lives.

Here is the definition you provided:

a•the•ist (ā'thē-ĭst) n. One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God

Not trying to be condescending, but since you’ve disregarded this so often, I have to ask: Do you know what the conjunction “OR” means, and how it differs from “AND”?

One who disbelieves the existence of god is an atheist. One who denies the existence of god is an atheist. One who does both is an atheist. A person who does either or both is an atheist.

I disbelieve the existence of god. I am an atheist by the definition above.

If I said: One who drives a truck or a car is a driver. Would you say that if someone only drove a car, and never a truck—that they are _not_ then a driver? You’re being argumentative here for the sake of being argumentative, and there is no point to it. It only derails us from the discussion: Does god exist?

Why are you creating a diversion? If I think your belief in god is unjustified, and I don’t believe in god’s existence; what difference does it make what you label me? Again—you can call me “Satanist” if you like. Whatever label you slap on me--even if it’s clearly a misconception (such as this latest distortion)—I don’t really care. The point is: I think your claim of god’s existence is unsupported and based on irrational reasoning. And that’s what I’ve been arguing all this time. Suddenly, you decided, that if you can label me something different, that somehow changes my claim that your beliefs are unsupported?

Call me “X” if it makes you feel better. It doesn’t matter to me at all. The problem remains that you still have failed to prove your premise. And it still appears as though no god exists.

And to make the point about “atheist” as crystal clear as possible:

Many people claim they are abducted by aliens.

They present “evidence” of this.

The evidence they present is extremely interpretive and inconclusive.

They show nothing that proves aliens even exist, let alone are abducting people.

Therefore, I do not believe aliens are abducting people. And based on the total lack of evidence, it appears the odds are slim to none their claims are based in reality—since nothing in reality justifies what they’re claiming.

It is logically possible that one day aliens may come forward and claim accountability for abducting all these people; in which case, I would have to now believe aliens actually _were_ abducting these people (or the aliens are lying).

But until aliens come forward to say this is occurring, I’d have to be pretty gullible and have extremely low standards of evidence in order to accept the current claims that aliens exist and are abducting people.

There is a clear lack of evidence alien abductions are occurring (agnostic, knowledge claim); and so it makes no sense to believe alien abductions are occurring (atheist, disbelief).

For practical purposes, I am willing to say “Alien abductions don’t occur.” (denial); However, logically speaking, I do allow the caveat that although there is currently no reason for anyone to believe this tripe, one day a reason could surface that would change that.

Plug in god, and you’ve got my stance on god’s existence.

I am an atheist. I am an agnostic atheist. I am whatever you want to call me. But no matter what you call me: I believe your claims are just as ridiculous as the claims above. And you’ve offered nothing more convincing than: “Well, logically speaking, a god _could_ exist—you can’t deny that!”

Your belief in god's existence is now as logically supported as alien abduction.

There is a huge difference between "belief" and "knowledge." Until I had Vertigo from an inner ear infection I "believed" it happened to people, but I had no personal "knowledge" of it. The same gap exists in the "belief" in God. I honestly feel that the problem is not a belief in God, but a lack of knowledge about God. Religion has misconstrued God in so many ways that the real true knowledge of God is obscured. You can "know" God without religion getting in the way at all (which seems to me to be it's only purpose). Knowledge of God does not come from without, it comes from within and therefore no one can prove it to you, or bring it to you or give it to you in any way. In order to experience God you must get "out of your mind" which means to simply be the presence that is aware that you have a mind and that it is separate from you. Do this by listening to your thoughts. Try it and see what you become aware of. I won't post again because debating about this subject is just a way for the mind/ego to distract you from experiencing your SELF. Peace.

I'm not sure how I got started reading all of this. I believe it was google hit on the search term "thou shalt not judge". It's ironic considering the amount of judgement present on both sides. It's ironic considering the judgement present both in this sentance and the one that preceeded it.

By the time I got through to the end my mind was full of judgement, but not about God's existance. It's been a long time since I've judged trying to prove/disprove something that cannot scientifically be proven/disproven is a waste of my time. Both Athiests and Religous persons should be able to agree with this point.

No, it was not god's existance that filled my mind with judgement. It was the lack of understanding, or the disregard of the full meaning of the word judgement, I perceived on both sides. This was my judgement. That single judgment produced similar feelings in me that I'm sure all of you have felt within this thread. That result is what is to be avoided.

I am athiest in that I do not believe in God as religous people do. I am spiritual in that I believe "god" is everywhere...much like religous people do. Right now, is the only time that is promised...by "god" or "life". Enjoy it! Stop the negativity and tolerate right now!

I'll make one final judgment in this post. Barbara's post:There is a huge difference between "belief" and "knowledge." Until I had Vertigo from an inner ear infection I "believed" it happened to people, but I had no personal "knowledge" of it. The same gap exists in the "belief" in God. I honestly feel that the problem is not a belief in God, but a lack of knowledge about God. Religion has misconstrued God in so many ways that the real true knowledge of God is obscured. You can "know" God without religion getting in the way at all (which seems to me to be it's only purpose). Knowledge of God does not come from without, it comes from within and therefore no one can prove it to you, or bring it to you or give it to you in any way. In order to experience God you must get "out of your mind" which means to simply be the presence that is aware that you have a mind and that it is separate from you. Do this by listening to your thoughts. Try it and see what you become aware of. I won't post again because debating about this subject is just a way for the mind/ego to distract you from experiencing your SELF. Peace. wins my vote for the best post in this thread. We should all reread it numerous times if we don't understand it.

PLEASE NOTE: The Atheist Experience has moved to a new location, and this blog is now closed to comments. To participate in future discussions, please visit http://www.freethoughtblogs.com/axp.

This blog encourages believers who disagree with us to comment. However, anonymous comments are disallowed to weed out cowardly flamers who hide behind anonymity. Commenters will only be banned when they've demonstrated they're nothing more than trolls whose behavior is intentionally offensive to the blog's readership.

Email policy

All emails sent to the program at the tv[at]atheist-community[dot]org address become the property of the ACA, and the desire for a reply is assumed. Note that this reply could take the form of a public response on the show or here on the blog. In those cases, we will never include the correspondent's address, but will include names unless we deem it inappropriate. If you absolutely do not wish for us to address your email publicly, please include a note to that effect (like "private response only" or "not for publication" or "if you post this on the blog please don't use my name") somewhere in the letter.

Google Analytics script

Subscribe To

AE and Related Sites

PLEASE NOTE: The Atheist Experience has moved to a new location, and this blog is now closed to comments. To participate in future discussions, please visit http://www.freethoughtblogs.com/axp.The Atheist Experience is a weekly live call-in television show sponsored by the Atheist Community of Austin. This independently-run blog (not sponsored by the ACA) features contributions from current and former hosts and co-hosts of the show.